White House seeking to slash renewable energy research: report

February 1, 2018
Spending for the Energy Department's Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy is currently set at $2.04 billion, but would drop to $575.5 million under the proposal reported by the Washington Post

The Trump administration will ask Congress to cut funding for clean energy and energy efficiency programs by 72 percent in this year's budget, according to a report in the Washington Post, underscoring its preference for fossil fuels.

The Post said it had obtained draft documents that outlined the administration's starting point for negotiations for the 2018 budget, set to be unveiled in February.

Congress, which is ultimately tasked with deciding appropriations, could push back—but the documents signal the White House's policy priorities, the newspaper said.

President Donald Trump has focused heavily on prioritizing the extraction of and their export around the world, especially the coal sector, which has long been in decline.

The Post said the proposed cuts were deeper than those the Trump administration sought for the current fiscal year, but was unable to implement because of a budget impasse in Congress, which has passed a stop-gap measure funding the federal government into February.

Spending for the Energy Department's Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy is currently set at $2.04 billion. It would drop to $575.5 million under the proposal.

"It shows that we've made no inroads in terms of convincing the administration of our value, and if anything, our value based on these numbers has dropped," a department employee told the Post on condition of anonymity.

Last week, the administration approved steep tariffs on imported solar panels in a move decried by the industry, which said it would lead to thousands of job losses and stunt investment.

Trump's last year proposed providing federal subsidies to nuclear and coal power plants, arguing the move was necessary to make the national grid more resilient to crises.

But the US watchdog terminated the proposal, finding it neither justified nor reasonable.

Explore further: Health groups urge Congress not to allow AIDS fight to wane

Related Stories

Health groups urge Congress not to allow AIDS fight to wane

November 29, 2017

A coalition of nearly 40 advocacy groups said Wednesday they're concerned about the Trump administration's commitment to the global fight against AIDS so they're urging senior members of Congress to make sure money for key ...

Obama budget asks to ramp up clean energy

February 14, 2011

US President Barack Obama, taking aim at climate change, proposed Monday to ramp up research in clean energy including small nuclear reactors while slashing subsidies for fossil fuels.

Recommended for you

Coffee-based colloids for direct solar absorption

March 22, 2019

Solar energy is one of the most promising resources to help reduce fossil fuel consumption and mitigate greenhouse gas emissions to power a sustainable future. Devices presently in use to convert solar energy into thermal ...


Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

1.7 / 5 (6) Feb 02, 2018
Drawing from the WaPo article without mentioning the administration's interest in shifting funding to nuclear energy research. Your antinuclear bias is showing. I've raised a kid who can see right through this, she and others like her are in college right now. You don't have much time left to get away 'clean' when dising nuclear.
5 / 5 (4) Feb 02, 2018
You know, I knew a lot of people who, in college, discovered a wider world outside of their parent's households. Good luck getting her to come back other than for tense thanksgivings...
2 / 5 (4) Feb 03, 2018
Tell her to hurry up, they have a quarter-trillion dollar mess in Fukushima. The only place for nuclear engineers will be for cleanup.

You cannot win any discussion here by supporting nukes. We know better.
2 / 5 (4) Feb 03, 2018
"Your antinuclear bias is showing."

My antinuclear bias is way too big to be seen here.
1 / 5 (1) Feb 05, 2018
...a quarter-trillion dollar mess...
Wind and solar are a trillion-dollar fiasco at reducing emissions. Intermittent renewables are just an economically/ecologically costly form of "greenwashing" for coal and natural gas(methane/fracking).
If Trump were smart and really wanted to promote coal, he would give full support to intermittent renewables because batteries and windmills and solar panels are manufactured thanks to cheap coal.
2 / 5 (4) Feb 05, 2018

Nukes are still losing! Exelon to close Oyster Creek nuke in October, a year early

Dive Brief:
Exelon reached an agreement with New Jersey to close its 636 MW Oyster Creek nuclear plant in New Jersey in October — about a year before the original December 2019 deadline.
The original arrangement to close the plant was reached in 2010, but operation costs rose, and the shutdown will allow the plant to avoid costly upgrades; the San Franisco Chronicle reported that Oyster Creek is the oldest operating nuclear plant in the United States, entering service in 1969.
Company officials say the early shutdown will help to manage costs, but they affirmed they are committed to helping employees at the plant. All employees will be offered a position elsewhere in Exelon, company officials said
1 / 5 (3) Feb 05, 2018
I'll bet Willi-kins is unaware of how battery technology saved part of Australia, as well.

This means no more polluting fossil plants will be needed.
4 / 5 (4) Feb 05, 2018
Actually, the renewable energy train has already left the station. The Fake President cannot do a thing about that. The only effect he can try to have is to make sure the USA falls behind in the new economy. He is making some progress there,
2 / 5 (4) Feb 05, 2018
"Actually, the renewable energy train has already left the station."

Yeah, but it is fun to see the panicked conservatives make up these silly stories while losing more every day.
1 / 5 (2) Feb 05, 2018
...how battery technology saved part of Australia...
This means no more polluting fossil plants will be needed.
Batteries are not replacing fossil fuels, they are complementing, i.e., providing "greenwashing" for fossil-fueled power plants.
There is no state or megacity 100% powered by batteries and sunshine and breeze unicorn energy, except in the gskam's lalaland.
2 / 5 (4) Feb 05, 2018
The batteries eliminate the need for fossil fuels as gap-fillers.
1 / 5 (1) Feb 05, 2018
The batteries eliminate the need for fossil fuels...
How are batteries manufactured/transported/installed/repaired/recycled? By sunshine&breeze-powered machines? Maybe in fairyland.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.